DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Forums - Discs & Movies - V for Vendetta.............:)

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

Mr.Badass wrote: It's is also gonna be a Delux dvd. (when I read it, I forgot what site though, I think it might have been here) i belive..and hope it would be something like Batman or Constantine- so the Deluxe Edition with book......... if you find anything about this release post it

Mr.Badass wrote: and I heard the dvd release date is 7th or 17th of july. I forgot but it's out in July

I think the rush to DVD hurts most cool chances at marketing the product. In the rush to get the DVD out, and miss an obvious choice date for release, added to the fact most people would not get it (or care)... They should release the DVD on November 5th. Not only would that tie it into the Holiday gift giving season, it would tie it into the movie.

The most expected answer is that I am right, and most people DON'T care or get it, so I know I am answering my own statement, but I care about the missed chances at adding to the coolness of the world, but it is all about the greater dollar.

I like this film. I hate to sound so cliche, but the book was better, much deeper, and over flowing with more meaning, but for it standing on it's own, the movie was very entertaining to me from the begining to the end. The cast was perfect, the action was great, the story was captivating, and the DVD release will be bought.

Aaron Schneiderman wrote: Yeah, I would say smarter... "Batman & Robin" may be bad and it may star the ego-maniac, George Clooney, but I would much rather sit through that film again rather than being fed the c**p dished out in "V for Vendetta." ...and I am quite confident that I am an intelligent human being.

Although for the record, what he was saying about good word of mouth and quality films making more money is true - depending on your definition of a good movie. For most people it's an epic fantasy that will take them away from their daily lives for the duration of the picture. That's why more heavy-handed topics and smaller films tend to do worse financially.

Which, is why if someone would make an award show that could compete with the oscars and honor those movies that are so insanely popular, more people would watch

The European bits were there because it made sense to me. I'm not blaming my condition as an ADD sufferer for the lapse in it, but it plays a minor role. I never review what I say until someone notices it. I should have put the European comments in 1 set of sentences and the thoughts of the movie into another set. I'll stand by what I said though because I didn't base my ideas on how this movie was produced or because it was a film focused on England. I enjoyed some of the undertones, but I didn't enjoy the overall feeling of being forced to see overtly placed reasons for the Ultra-Conservative government to be hated. I could have done with some subtlety.

Franchise wrote: [Europe vs. America? I'm by far from trying to fan the flames in this area. I could care less whether or not America is liked on the European forum. I joined here to talk about movies and not about political choice. I was expressing that. I hope your hatred of jelly donuts doesn't find its way to a jelly donut forum or there will really be an online war.

I wasn't refering to you only, I was refering to a general theme I felt growing on this board. I stand by my original statement that your particular post didn't make any sense. Why did you add the bits about Europe?

Aaron, if ou do read this, I'm sorry that my opinon p**sed you off so much, but I was hoping to hear negative comments about the film as a film, like Franchise stated (minus the Europe bits). My point was that you or me not liking a particular film should have something to do with the film, rather than what the masses think about it. For you, the politics were the major flaw, for me it was the ocassional lack of subtlety whilst expressing those politics. I really was trying to keep the discussion to the film over it's politics, but apparently my statements were read as politically driven.

Chris wrote: And you are unbelievably banned. I warned you early on in the thread, but you just couldn't help yourself. Come back in a week when you're less hostile towards other members whose viewpoint differers from your own.

Amen to that Chris.....finaly..... and to Aaron..if you think that BOX OFFICE is what defines Movie as god or bad..than you are a Big Ignorant....and it you who shuold take school- any school that would make you think !!.

And you are unbelievably banned. I warned you early on in the thread, but you just couldn't help yourself. Come back in a week when you're less hostile towards other members whose viewpoint differers from your own.

BTW, your 'similar' argument would hold more weight if less than fifty percent of the films you mention actually had something in common with 'V'.

Did you guys take reading comprehension in school? I was comparing films of a SIMILAR GENRE to see, if this heavily marketed, and controversial film, was able to drive traffic to movie theaters. If you don't believe that people can and will be influenced positively and negatively by word-of-mouth, then you are very blind. I suggest you all take some business courses because your level of ignorance is gargantuan. Overall box office numbers have been declining because the quality of the films being offered has declined. This has been discussed ad nauseam in the media. What measure are they using to make this argument? Could it be overall box office? Hmmmmmm...? GENERALLY, GOOD FILMS DO WELL. In life you can always find exceptions to any rule. But if you are gonna deny that GENERALLY a GOOD FILM makes a handsome..oh my God, PROFIT, then you are being absolutely foolish. After the marketers do their job, REVIEWS, BUZZ and WORD-OF-MOUTH help to drive traffic to a theater as much as they can KILL IT after opening weekend. If you are gonna deny that, then why the hell do you guys review DVDs? Do you think you guys may have any influence on sales? YOU GUYS ARE UNBELIEVABLY THICK.

Chris wrote: I normally stay out of these little discussions, but you're twisting Gabe's words here. He was merely pointing out that box office gross is not a yardstick by which you can measure a film's worth; he never said it was all about art.

Studios make films that they think will appeal to the widest section of people, but that doesn't make them good films. What are your feelings towards Revenge of the Sith? Top grossing movie of last year in the US, but not a great film. Hell, Charlie and the Chocolate factory and Mr. & Mrs. Smith made it into the top ten. A foreign flick like Sympathy for Lady Vengeance won't make a dent on the US box ofice; doesn't mean it's a bad film.

I've actually looked at some of the films that made the US top ten in the last few years and they don't all scream 'quality'. Men in Black II? The Day After Tomorrow? Bruce Almighty? The Mummy Returns? Come on... Sure, the money aspect is important as that is what drives the studios to make films, but they don't always get it right and it's certainly not an indicator of a film's worth.

It's these films that make the big money that are the reason that the studios are able to make your riskier films. I definitely agree with the overall point you've made too. It hardly ever seems like people remember the huge summer blockbusters when you talk 5 years down the line. They'll cite films like Fight Club as their memorable movies. I like my fair share of big budget blown up movies like Terminator 2, but I'd rather settle down some nights with Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance or Donnie Darko for the story driven movie.

Gabe Powers wrote: Franchise, I agree with your opinon of the movie, but what the f**k does any of it have to do with Europe.

"Anti-American sentiment may be all the rage in Europe, but when you look at this movie, it was long-winded." "I have nothing against Europeans or any other confederation of nations, but this movie was a bit too hammer-like to me." Um, did Europe make the movie? That's like saying "I don't really like jelly donuts, but King Kong was about twenty minutes too long..."

This is getting really stupid. Everyone quit with this (passive-aggressive or not) Europe VS America c**p before it gets out of hand.

Europe vs. America? I'm by far from trying to fan the flames in this area. I could care less whether or not America is liked on the European forum. I joined here to talk about movies and not about political choice. I was expressing that. I hope your hatred of jelly donuts doesn't find its way to a jelly donut forum or there will really be an online war.

Gabe Powers wrote: Oh come on Aaron, now you're saying the US box office dictates a film's value. I don't care what you think about V for Vendetta, but who the f**k, other than the studios, gives a s**t about how much money a film makes? No offense, but you're sounding kind of like our old banned friend Floyd Dylan, who made the same argument while discussing Kevin Smith's films. Lets take a look at some of the "horrible" films that the public didn't go see:

So, yes, let us celebrate the tastes of the American public as a valued measure of film content. Thank You Gabe...that's exactly what I wanted to post...especialy the "Oldboy" numbers made me laugh- but hey, subtitles, who can read them And to Aaron- if you realy belive that US BOX OFFICE is what defines the movie (is it bad or good) than it is another prove that you don't know a bit about miovies..sorry. O..btw. I don't mean to offend u- but how old are you Aaron. ??

I normally stay out of these little discussions, but you're twisting Gabe's words here. He was merely pointing out that box office gross is not a yardstick by which you can measure a film's worth; he never said it was all about art.

Studios make films that they think will appeal to the widest section of people, but that doesn't make them good films. What are your feelings towards Revenge of the Sith? Top grossing movie of last year in the US, but not a great film. Hell, Charlie and the Chocolate factory and Mr. & Mrs. Smith made it into the top ten. A foreign flick like Sympathy for Lady Vengeance won't make a dent on the US box ofice; doesn't mean it's a bad film.

I've actually looked at some of the films that made the US top ten in the last few years and they don't all scream 'quality'. Men in Black II? The Day After Tomorrow? Bruce Almighty? The Mummy Returns? Come on... Sure, the money aspect is important as that is what drives the studios to make films, but they don't always get it right and it's certainly not an indicator of a film's worth.

Gabe Powers wrote: Oh come on Aaron, now you're saying the US box office dictates a film's value. I don't care what you think about V for Vendetta, but who the f**k, other than the studios, gives a s**t about how much money a film makes? No offense, but you're sounding kind of like our old banned friend Floyd Dylan, who made the same argument while discussing Kevin Smith's films.

Somebody better care if a film can drive audiences to the theaters. Gabe, you are incredibly naive if you think it should be all about ART! Give me a break. You have named a few exceptions (and there are ALWAYS exceptions) but you are nuts if you don't think that box office is GENERALLY indicative of a film's over all merits. More often than not, great films make money. If they don't make money they aren't going to be made. You also overlooked the fact that I was using films in a similar genre. Compare my list to the misleading list you prepared. And do me a favor...never compare me to an uneducated imbecile like Floyd Dylan. And Kevin Smith's films DO suck.

and to think it is only a MOVIE with an idea.... I thought it was great and enjoyed my popcorn with seeing this writers idea of a futuristic Britian..... It's amazing how far things can go now a days before we realise it's only a MOVIE!

Franchise, I agree with your opinon of the movie, but what the f**k does any of it have to do with Europe.

"Anti-American sentiment may be all the rage in Europe, but when you look at this movie, it was long-winded." "I have nothing against Europeans or any other confederation of nations, but this movie was a bit too hammer-like to me." Um, did Europe make the movie? That's like saying "I don't really like jelly donuts, but King Kong was about twenty minutes too long..."

This is getting really stupid. Everyone quit with this (passive-aggressive or not) Europe VS America c**p before it gets out of hand.

Anti-American sentiment may be all the rage in Europe, but when you look at this movie, it was long-winded. I thought some stuff could have been cut and I would have gotten the same message with everything left in. I have nothing against Europeans or any other confederation of nations, but this movie was a bit too hammer-like to me. Like a hammer pounding the message that it was trying hard to push out. By the time I got the political message, I didn't really care for it. I was looking for the interaction between V and Evey. I liked how V represented every man that has ever been supressed, but I didn't care for the spoonfed storyline.

Oh come on Aaron, now you're saying the US box office dictates a film's value. I don't care what you think about V for Vendetta, but who the f**k, other than the studios, gives a s**t about how much money a film makes? No offense, but you're sounding kind of like our old banned friend Floyd Dylan, who made the same argument while discussing Kevin Smith's films. Lets take a look at some of the "horrible" films that the public didn't go see:

£ukasz D wrote: (what shows greatly what kind of movies do Americans like-read c**py) I love the fact that once again it is greatly shown that non American movie( shot in Uk- Uk actors) is nnot liked in USa..what a supprise Sigh...I'm not even going to start into those two statements...Quote: ...alli mean to say is that you can't denay how great this movie is in way of script, plot, acting and stuf...... You're opinion of this movie is that you liked it and think it's great, more power to you, glad you liked it, but you can't make your opinion of it into a statement of fact. Aaron didn't like the movie, you did--there's no right or wrong here no matter what your opinion, his opinion, some user review from Amazon, or anyone else's opinion of the movie may be based on or whether they did or did not understand it.

Aaron Schneiderman wrote: Now, now...name calling and anti-American sentiments will get you nowhere ...stop sounding so ignorant. ...i'm not anti-american Aron....altough you probably know what people in europ think about USA-and agree with this.....but... all I say is that your streange conspiracy teory and (sorry) stupid look at this film is a big mistake......... and to prove what I mean read one guy review on Amazon...he wrote that this movie is bad couse it is Ant-American and that is bad..........and that is plain stupid.

Now, now...name calling and anti-American sentiments will get you nowhere ...stop sounding so ignorant. There is more to my negative feelings about the film than your narrow reading of Mr. Medved's review. I am trying to avoid a purely political discussion but you people just love to tease me.

Aaron Schneiderman wrote: Yeah, I would say smarter... "Batman & Robin" may be bad and it may star the ego-maniac, George Clooney, but I would much rather sit through that film again rather than being fed the c**p dished out in "V for Vendetta." ...and I am quite confident that I am an intelligent human being.

i'm definetely sure that box-office numbers are only USA.... (what shows greatly what kind of movies do Americans like-read c**py) I love the fact that once again it is greatly shown that non American movie( shot in Uk- Uk actors) is nnot liked in USa..what a supprise ...alli mean to say is that you can't denay how great this movie is in way of script, plot, acting and stuf...... and Aaron if you base your bad opinion about it only on the fact that Mr. Medved wrote in his review..than that is plain buls**t..saying this movie is about makeing terrorist hero is stupid.

Yeah, I would say smarter... "Batman & Robin" may be bad and it may star the ego-maniac, George Clooney, but I would much rather sit through that film again rather than being fed the c**p dished out in "V for Vendetta." ...and I am quite confident that I am an intelligent human being.

Aaron Schneiderman wrote: Domestically, it's even behind the much maligned "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen." Maybe people are smarter than I thought. Hmm...not sure 'smarter' is the right word to use in this context, atleast not when Batman & Robin is being used as an example.

I thought I would be humorous to see if this film was driving traffic to the theaters since it is so "brilliant." Lets put this c**ppy flick's popularity in proper perspective. Since it is winding down its release, I thought it would be cool to compare it's box office to similar films in the comic book genre (All numbers are reprinted from Boxoffice Mojo):

V For Vendetta's Domestic Total as of Apr. 9, 2006: $62,257,000 (Estimate) Release Date: March 17, 2006 Production Budget: $54 million

I'm already sorry I made the comment about "not getting the plot", it wasn't the right mix of words, I think that Medved (a review who I am familiar with, I was just having a go) misread some of the films meaning. Did you see the film Aaron? I know there was a bit of a conservative outcry against it, and good for you going and making your own assesment.

You did however slightly misquote me, I refered to V as the PROTAGONIST, not the HERO. I think if the story had a hero, it was Portman's character.

and £ukasz D, you do realize that I'm an American citizen, and that the vast majority of American critics liked the film, right?

£ukasz D wrote: And Aron-sorry to say this but saying that it's crpay movie-it is obvies that you didn't understand it. No, what's obvious is that Aaron thought it was a c**ppy movie, and drawing from his own personal experiences and differences in politics, theology, geography, etc., etc. took away something different from it than you did.

one more interesting thing............. there is like 108 reviews on Amazon...about 5% of them is saying it's a bad movie........jet what supprises me the most (or maybe not ?) is the fact that: 95% of bad reviews are form USA people Mein and only reason for the bad review is that the movie glorify terrorism (sick!!) and is to political.

Can I tell you how much happy i'm of my very right prediction of reaction form USA citizens to this movie....if I could bet 100 $ on what I was sure thet will be writen by some American - I would be a millioner by now.

The review by Mr. Medved made my laugh so much that I almost cryed...... Just as Gabe wrote- I don't think, i'm sure that Mr. Medved didn't got the plot at all..he wasn't even close to.

This definetely one of THE BEST MOVIES i've seen in 5 yeras-just as i've writen before. I've writen why I think it's great-so I wont do it again...but to sum up- I can't find a bether words to describe the greatnes of this movie than what Gabe Powers wrote:

"I thought the base darkness of V was the most interesting part of the film. He's got the right idea, but he's a monster himself in a way, on a personal vendetta more than a man truely trying to bring about change. That's the whole point of the final act of the film..."

P.S. Cool Chris- we won't let it get out of hand ..just a calm, inteligent discusion.

P.S. I have nothing against USA....but you Americans shouldn't realy act like Mr. Michael Moore (the one from F 9/11) and try to find anything in every movie that is at least a bit about terrorism similar to a tragedy of 9/11. This movie (V for Vendetta) is not about makeing terrorist heros..it's exactly baout what GP wrote....an IDEA that can't be kiled but is very dengerous in both ways.

And Aron-sorry to say this but saying that it's crpay movie-it is obvies that you didn't understand it.

Michael Medved is a former 60s Liberal turned Conservative that is a movie critic and most recently radio talk show host. He and Jeffrey Lyons were the initial replacements for the PBS review show "Sneak Previews" which made stars of movie critics, Roger Ebert and the late Gene Siskel. I think he understood the plot fine Gabe, in fact, I used his review because I couldn't have summed up my thoughts better after watching that c**p fest. Natalie Portman (an Israeli) should be ashamed for taking the role.

..and I still prefer my heroes both real and fictional to have character, ethics and a strong sense of what is right and what is wrong.

I usually prefer my sci-fi,/political aligory to be a little less dated and maybe a little more subtle, but I've been informed by friends that all the secondary elements seemingly added to contemporize the film were already in the comic. I thought it was a good film, but not a great one. The action sequences felt pretty tacked-on, and were obviously the Wachowski brothers directoral contribution.

I did appriciate the ironic casting of John Hurt as the malevolent, fascist leader. For those of you who aren't aware, he was the lead in the 1984 adaptation of 1984. This film, like pretty much ALL aligorical sci-fi, is a retelling of that classic Orwell tale.

In the end, besides some amazing performances, and an undeniable set of big brass balls, V for Vendetta feels a little like Revolution 2.0 for High Schoolers.

ps: Who is this Michael Medved guy? I've got more reviews in the Rotten Tomatoes data base? I don't think he understood a lot of the plot, and I don't think he appriciates antagonistic protagonists very much. I thought the base darkness of V was the most interesting part of the film. He's got the right idea, but he's a monster himself in a way, on a personal vendetta more than a man truely trying to bring about change. That's the whole point of the final act of the film.

I am gonna let Michael Medved's review illustrate how I feel about this thinly veiled piece of propaganda:

V FOR VENDETTA- V for vile, vicious, vacuous, venal, verminous and vomitaceous. Five years after 9/11 we get our first big studio, big budget extravaganza making the case of suicidal terrorism as the ultimate form of heroism. The plot serves to illustrate the profound statement of the protagonist that “blowing up a building can change the world.” ...The “V” of the title appears only in a plastic, gaudy, impenetrable Guy Fawkes mask. He means to honor the Catholic rebel who attempted to blow up the Houses of Parliament on November 5, 1605, and “V” is determined to enjoy better luck at some Fifth of November in the future. He commits murder and mayhem in order to smite the evil “Conservative” (yes, they use that word) government that’s taken over Great Britain after the collapse and destruction of the United States (due, we’re informed, to our misguided Middle Eastern wars). The government (headed by the snarling, spittle-spewing John Hurt) is both Christian (with anew flag featuring the cross) and Fascistic: arresting, torturing and murdering any suspected homosexuals (female as well as male) and making even the possession of any copy of the Koran a capital crime. The mysterious V, with Zorro’s wardrobe and that heavily rouged mask, brings the evil right-wingers to their knees by murdering some of their leaders, blowing up prominent buildings, and recruiting the innocent, unsuspecting Evey (Natalie Portman) as his sole accomplice. None of this makes sense, as a dogged police inspector (Steven Rea) tries to unravel the mysteries of V’s background and whereabouts, but the leftwing propaganda remains heavyhanded and unmistakable. At one point, Rea discovers that the horrendous terrorist attack that led to the right-wing takeover was actually staged by the government, then later blamed on innocent Islamists. The visual imagery and story-telling suggest an odd meld of “Phantom of the Opera,” “1984,” and “Fahrenheit 9/11,” but about halfway through a long and slow-moving slog the undeniable looniness of the enterprise loses its entertainment value. The performances (particularly by poor, abused Natalie Portman) are more energetic than expected, and the dark vision of the near future remains stylish and intriguing. Unfortunately, the plot’s single big surprise (involving V’s ultimate –and sadistic- demonstration of love for Evey) makes no sense at all, considering the script’s insistence that the masked rebel works without henchmen or assistants. Rated "R" for occasionally bloody violence as the Caped anti-Crusader wreaks his hideous revenge. TWO STARS for a movie that’s both slick and sick – competent enough to count as truly dangerous and hateful in its open glorification of terrorist violence. That’s a wrap. I’m Michael Medved for Eye on Entertainment

I won't go as far as you do to say how good the movie is, but I will say I found it entertaining. By the end of the movie, I was looking for other things hidden deeper in the meaning though considering the political end of it was spoon fed. I'll be picking up the DVD, but it won't be for the political bit, but more for the enigma that V was and the love story that was undertoned through the whole bit.

And your English isn't the worst. Now, if you tried shortening it by making you into you or did internet shorthand, I'd just call you lazy.

Hello.....i saw it yesterday in theater..and I hope it';s ok to share my thoughts with U. Im one word....GENIUS, GREAT, MONUMENTAL, BRILIANT....PERFECT. For me one of the best movies i've seen in last 4 years, maybe even on of the best i've ever saw. Great pice of movie-art. Movie close to perfection. Briliant climat, great dialogues, outstanding acting- all this elemnst makes a great film. Hugo Weaving as V creates (in my opinion) the best ever Comic book character that was brought to a movie screen. Hes is just perfect in the way he speaks, moves, fights. His creation of a romantic jet somehow vilan character is breath-takeing. Portman and the rest of the cast also reaches highest level of acting. Music in the film is perfectly fit. Special Efects are very good (although there are noot many- I belive it is the least Special"Efected" comic adaptation ever). For all the 137 minutes of the film, you can't be bored by even one minut. It's the best movie of 2006 for sure...one of the best in last 4 -5 years for me. Can't wait for the DVD.....when will it come ??????when